The Copenhagen Accord does not set quantified targets for future reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases by developed countries, and it does not set specific targets for cuts in global emissions by 2020 and 2050. Nevertheless, a post-Kyoto Protocol consensus is gradually forming, signaling the arrival of the age of the “low-carbon economy.”
Countries around the world are promoting new green policies as their strategy for reducing greenhouse gases — the main cause of global warming — in the coming period. They are actively developing green energy technology and low-carbon products to lead green growth and move toward a low-carbon world.
Taiwan is not a signatory to the UN Framework Agreement on Climate Change, and we were not able to take part in the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. However, Taiwan lives in the same global village as every other country, so we cannot ignore the issue of global warming. Alongside other countries, we have to face up to this, mankind’s greatest-ever common challenge. The unfortunate thing is that in recent years, Taiwan’s diplomatic isolation has denied our national leaders any opportunity to take part in consultations and negotiations about these kinds of major international issues. Consequently, they are rather unfamiliar with issues such as global warming and climate change.
In contrast, leaders of other countries, having taken part in the conference themselves, have had a more vivid education about climate change. They consider it their personal responsibility to work out policies in response to global warming, and are raising the climate change issue to the level of national security and development. Let us hope that our own leaders can face up to this threat and that, after gaining a thorough understanding of the issues involved, they raise climate policy to the level of national defense. Our leaders should take the helm of our country’s climate change policies and map out their vision for Taiwan’s progress toward a low-carbon economy and lifestyle.
In Taiwan, the government department responsible for energy policy is the Bureau of Energy, which comes under the Ministry of Economic Affairs. This subordinate position is symbolic of the fact that decisions on energy policy are dependent on economic development strategy. This downgrading of energy policy issues demonstrates that the country’s priorities are in the wrong order and runs contrary to world trends. Energy policy should be treated as having at least the same level of importance as economic development.
The government should aim to develop the economy based on limited energy resources. Faced with the challenge of climate change, Taiwan could choose to just go through the motions of responding to the UN’s demands for reduced greenhouse emissions, or it could show courage and resolution by treating climate change as a historic opportunity to make a thorough transformation and develop a low-carbon economy.
South Korea, which is not far away from Taiwan, is a fine example of the latter approach, as it has put forward the most ambitious emission reduction proposals of any developing country. By 2020, South Korea proposes to cut its carbon dioxide emissions to at least 4 percent below those of 2005. It has invested 79 percent of economic stimulus funds in green energy resources — the highest figure in the world. South Korea has also stated its intention to become the world’s seventh-biggest green manufacturing economy by 2020. It plans to devote 2 percent of GDP for the next five years — 197 trillion won (US$175.1 billion) — to the green energy sector. South Korea plans to increase its share in the world market for solar energy, wind power and fuel cells to 8 percent. Evidently South Korea has seen the potential benefits of the changing world situation, and hopes to turn a global crisis into an opportunity for developing its industry. Comparing this situation with Taiwan, one cannot help worrying that our country will lag further and further behind South Korea in the course of this new wave.
The Copenhagen conference is over. Although developing countries are not obliged to pledge quantifiable emission reductions, developed countries are strongly demanding that developing countries take voluntary measures to cut emissions, and that these reductions be measurable, reportable and verifiable. Newly industrialized countries like South Korea and Taiwan will have to come up with emission reduction plans suited to their national conditions, and which must be transparent. Although Taiwan has already set ambitious carbon reduction targets for 2020 and 2050 that comply with world trends, we lack a clear road map for achieving them. Such an abstract plan of action stands little chance of achieving its goals.
Taiwan has few resources available to use in cutting its carbon dioxide output. More than half of all its greenhouse gas emissions are generated by industry. This makes reduction difficult and expensive. The government should work hard on formulating comprehensive carbon reduction policies and help Taiwan’s industry enter the post-Kyoto era. Besides, following the Copenhagen conference, and as carbon reduction targets become legally binding, trade barriers will start to emerge connected with energy-saving and carbon reduction issues. Taiwan must pay attention to these ongoing developments and respond accordingly to avoid losses for industrial firms in Taiwan.
Eugene Chien was the first head of the Environmental Protection Administration and is chairman of the Taiwan Institute for Sustainable Energy.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS